Plagiarism Allegations Emerge in Testimony Against Arizona’s Save Women’s Sports Act

Plagiarism Allegations Emerge in Testimony Against Arizona’s Save Women’s Sports Act

Arizona Republicans have initiated a legal challenge to the testimony of a prominent advocate for transgender youth, claiming it includes extensive plagiarism. This allegation arises amidst ongoing legal proceedings concerning the controversial Save Women’s Sports Act.

Senate President Warren Petersen characterized this situation in a statement to Fox News Digital, stating, “The ultimate gaslight is to say that a boy is a girl. Now, we have learned that the expert witness did more than gaslight. We have presented the court with multiple examples of identical or virtually identical phrasing used by other academics without any attribution.” Petersen leads the defense in a case contesting the Save Women’s Sports Act, which now awaits a potential Supreme Court review.

The core of the plagiarism accusation focuses on Dr. Daniel Shumer, a clinical associate professor of pediatrics and the medical director of the Gender Services Program at the University of Michigan. Petersen claims Shumer plagiarized portions of his expert testimony against Arizona’s Save Women’s Sports Act at least 22 times.

Petersen firmly asserted, “Over the past two years, I have led the charge to defend Arizona’s commonsense law that protects women in sports. Despite attacks from the left, I have been grateful for the chance to champion the integrity of women’s sports, particularly in the absence of our state’s attorney general. I am hopeful that the U.S. Supreme Court will uphold our state’s right to protect women’s sports.”

On Wednesday, Petersen filed a Daubert motion, a formal request to exclude Shumer from serving as the opposing expert witness. The motion argues that Shumer’s opinions lack reliability due to the alleged plagiarism and his insufficient qualifications.

The document highlights that Shumer purportedly borrowed phrases from witnesses involved in similar cases, such as Stephen Rosenthal from Alabama and Joshua Safer from West Virginia, without giving proper credit. One significant instance noted by Petersen involves Shumer nearly verbatim reproducing language from Rosenthal’s report dated April 21, 2022, in a document he submitted on October 10, 2024.

Dissecting the Allegations

Rosenthal’s report articulates, “Any attempts to ‘cure’ transgender individuals by forcing their gender identity into alignment with their assigned sex are harmful, dangerous, and ineffective. Those practices have been denounced as unethical by all major professional associations of medical and mental health professionals, such as WPATH, the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Psychological Association.”

In contrast, Shumer’s submission states, “Attempts to ‘cure’ transgender individuals by forcing their gender identity into alignment with their birth sex are harmful and ineffective. Those practices have been widely denounced as unethical by all major professional associations of medical and mental health professionals, such as the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Psychological Association, among others.”

Shumer’s Response to Plagiarism Accusations

The University of Michigan defines plagiarism as the “appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit.” In a deposition from February 18, 2025, Shumer appeared to acknowledge instances of plagiarism in his report.

During the deposition, he stated, “I don’t believe that an expert report necessarily constitutes research and this U of M Standard Practice Guideline may or may not be applicable to an expert report. Also, as an expert in this case, I’m not performing duties related to my role in the University of Michigan. Nevertheless, some words were used from other sources without appropriate credit, which meets this definition.”

When questioned about the importance of citing sources in expert reports, Shumer admitted, “Because I believe that it’s the right thing to do when there’s material initially written by someone else that you’re using to make a similar point.”

The Focus of Shumer’s Work

In his role at the Child and Adolescent Gender Services Clinic at Mott Children’s Hospital, Shumer oversees various medical interventions, including hormone therapies. As an established expert witness, he has been involved in litigation against policies aimed at restricting access to gender-affirming care for minors.

Shumer has gained attention through various social media platforms, particularly through posts from Stand with Trans, an organization that aims to support transgender youth and their families. His involvement in educational sessions during Trans Empowerment Month illustrates his commitment to spreading awareness and understanding of transgender issues.

In a recent Instagram post from September 12, 2024, Stand with Trans recognized Shumer as a leading pediatric endocrinologist who would address common misconceptions about transgender health care and educate families on the referral process for pediatric gender clinics.

The Next Steps in this Controversy

As the lawsuit proceeds, the allegations against Shumer raise important questions about the integrity of expert testimony and the standards of academic and scientific reporting. The legal implications surrounding these accusations could have significant ramifications for ongoing and future cases regarding transgender rights and participation in sports.

Fox News Digital reached out to both Dr. Shumer and the University of Michigan for comments but has not yet received a response. With the case developing, eyes across the nation continue to watch the proceedings closely, as they could influence similar legislative actions elsewhere.